solved Law Talk Topic:Â This week we will be focusing our

Law Talk Topic: 
This week we will be focusing our discussion on patient consent. You should skim Chapter 14 before proceeding with this assignment. Focus your attention on the Matter of Dubreuil case on page 391.
Scenario for Post 1
You represent the hospital, and insist that the hospital has the right to assert the state’s interest over Ms. R. E. Fusal. Ms. Fusal is refusing to accept a blood transfusion. Without it, she will die. The hospital attorney is preparing for a court hearing where the judge will determine whether to order the transfusion or enforce the patient’s refusal. What arguments can you provide to the hospital attorney? What is the hospital’s rationale for requiring this patient to receive treatment?
Scenario for Post 2
Read through the posts submitted by your fellow students for Post 1. Choose a post that interests you, and respond to it. But for this post, you no longer represent the hospital. Now, you represent Ms. R. E. Fusal. What arguments would you tell the judge on her behalf? What are your issues with the arguments presented to the judge by the hospital in Post 1?
Scenario for Post 3
Now you choose. Read through the posts submitted by the class. What is your opinion? What side seemed to have more valid arguments? Should a hospital have the right to require treatment? Why / why not? Be sure to support your opinion by citing to a fellow student’s post.

For Scenario 2
Good afternoon everyone,
As the hospital representative, I will base my arguments on the patient bill of rights to help the hospital attorney argue the case of Ms. Fusal, Ms. Fusal’s health is progressively becoming worse, and she will die if she does not accept the blood transfusion. In that case, the hospital has the ethical responsibility to prioritize the difficult decision to save the life of the patient (Pozgar, 2020). Since the patient bill of rights is categorical on the incidences of recommendation in treatment, transfer, or referral, the patient is entitled to the known risks, benefits, and alternatives so that her health is not jeopardized (Pozgar, 2020). Additionally, as the hospital representative, I will urge the attorney to make the court understand the advantages involved in Ms. Fusal’s blood transfusion. Besides, the court should understand that there is no other treatment that can help save her life. The court should order the blood transfusion based on the ruling of Judge J. Wright on Mrs. Jones’s life, who had previously refused a blood transfusion. I understand that court systems in some jurisdictions have ruled that patients may have a general legal right to receive emergency medical treatment (Pozgar, 2012). In recent years, however, courts in many areas have shown increasing interest in allowing hospitals to turn people away, at least for medical problems. In this case, the factual base was that unless Ms. Fusal received treatmentor she would die. In short, all countries agree on state interests that should be considered when deciding whether or not to order a patient to have a voluntary blood transfusion. The state interest includes protecting the integrity of the medical profession and the preservation of life (Lewis, 2021). As a result, the idea here is to save Ms. Fusal’s life. Therefore, granted the jurisdiction, the hospital must ensure that they inform the patient on the consequences of the blood transfusion process and ensure it gets done diligently to save her life. When the judge determined how urgent and life-threatening the scenario was, he ordered the transfusion to happen.
Reference
Lewis, B. C. (2021). Bioethics and the Law Notes, Cases, and Problems.
Pozgar, D. (2012). Legal Aspects of Health Care Administration, 11th Ed . Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett Learning.

For Scenario 3
As the hospital attorney, it is in my best interest to protect every patient, make sure every patient is receiving quality care, and treat as needed. Today I present you, the urgency of Ms. Fusal’s blood transfusion. I can assure you that Ms. Fusal is a competent adult, she is a single-mother who has a 10 year old son depending on her at home. I have brought with me all her medical records, including diagnostic imaging, and lab results. Ms. Fusal has been informed of the advantages of receiving treatment and the fact that there is currently no other treatment that can save her life. Despite Ms. Fusal’s refusal of treatment, our doctors continue to give her the best possible care within the parameters she has set for us. Our doctors and I all come together to day to stress the importance of this transfusion and only hope that Ms. Fusual will one day return home to her son.
Reference:
Pozgar, G. D. (2019). Legal aspects of health care administration (13th ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.